DOCSLIB.ORG

ALA, IFLA, and Israel/Palestine

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
ALA, IFLA, and Israel/Palestine Al Kagan ALA, IFLA, and Israel/Palestine Introduction: U.S. Activism Around Palestinian Issues The need for actions around Israel/Palestine is as current today as ever. In the light of Israel’s latest massive attack on Gaza in the summer of 2014 and recent Israeli elections, this is an important moment to reexamine the ALA and IFLA history around the situation in Israel/Palestine. As media activist and author Bob McChesney says, the mainstream media rarely discusses issues unless the Democrats and Republicans weigh in. The Israeli electorate’s continuing and increasing turn to the hard right has now provoked a very public argument between President Obama and Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu, as well as the U.S. Democratic Party and the State of Israel. Netanyahu’s election 68 eve statement declaring an end to his nominal support for a two-state solution and his racist words against a large voting turnout by Arab citizens of Israel have blown whatever was left of the polite veneer over the brutal policies already in-place. All of a sudden the mainstream media is actually discussing the relationship between the United States and Israel. This public debate will certainly have effects within the U.S. and Israeli publics, and likely help educate many more people about the brutal effects of the Israeli policies in the Occupied Territories of the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem. And ALA Council normally follows U.S. public opinion. In addition, the current controversy adds to a very real shift of U.S. public opinion toward Israel over the last twenty years or so, especially within the U.S. Jewish community. The rise of the lobbying groups, Jewish Voice for Peace in Al Kagan is a long time member of PLG and was SRRT Councilor for 14 years. He joined the PLG Coordinating Committee after he retired in 2013. He is the author of Progressive Library Organizations: A Worldwide History (McFarland, 2015). KEYWORDS: Censorship; Israel; Occupied Territories; Palestine; International Federation of Library Associations; American Library Association; ALA Council; Social Responsibilities Round Table; Neutrality; Activist librarians. 1996 and J Street in 2008 (“Pro-Israel and Pro-Peace”), are a good indication of this shift. Librarians have pressed ALA to confront Israeli government censorship and the destruction of Palestinian libraries and culture since 1984.1 Organizing around Israel/Palestine issues has always been tough for U.S. progressives. There is perhaps no more difficult foreign policy topic due to the very close political, military, and economic alliance between the U.S. and Israeli governments and their connections with transnational corporations. This results in a U.S. mainstream media perspective that historically has nearly always parroted the U.S. government. Further, memories of the Holocaust still permeate public opinion, and there is a powerful Israel lobby consisting of both Jewish and Christian evangelical Zionists, who have their established and influential lobbying arms, such as the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), B’nai B’rith, Hadassah Women’s Zionist Organization of America, and Christians United for Israel. Israel is often characterized as the only democracy in a “sea of Arab dictatorships.” As a result, note that current fallout from the Israeli elections has so far had zero effect on U.S. military and economic aid to Israel. Some have asked SRRT over the years why it has concentrated on specific countries, especially Israel. The logic is very simple, as taxpayers our money is funding wars and atrocities. We therefore have a direct connection to these 69 policies. The hope is that if a grassroots movement could mobilize enough support, it might be possible to change U.S. policies. From 1949 to 2013, the U.S. government has given more than $130 billion in direct aid to Israel, and has spent about $3 trillion on the Israel-Palestine conflict (through 2002). This is more than four times the cost of the Viet Nam War.2 And there are more reasons to focus on Israel/Palestine, including a close parallel with South Africa.3 Depending on how one counts, the 1967 Israeli occupation of the Palestinian territories is either the longest or second longest current occupation of another people’s land.4 The occupation is also noteworthy because of Israel’s attempt to destroy much of the people’s culture and history, many even going so far as to argue that Palestinians are not even a separate people. And although mainstream U.S. opinion-makers try to debunk the term, Israel has indeed established a kind of apartheid regime in the West Bank, with separate roads and amenities for Israelis and Palestinians.5 Progressive librarians organized through the Social Responsibilities Round Table (SRRT) and the Progressive Librarians Guild (PLG) have faced the same obstacles as other progressives who have tried to lobby for a U.S. policy based on justice and respect for all who live in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories. Progressive librarians have had only fleeting success in organizing around ALA’s core principle of freedom of expression, and faced a coordinated national backlash from the Israel lobby as described below. The Censorship Situation from the 1930s to the 1980s The first ALA controversies around Israel/Palestine addressed censorship. In 1991, the American Library Association published in coordination with Article 19, the International Centre on Censorship, an annual report titled Information Freedom and Censorship.6 The eight-page section on “Israel and the Occupied Territories”7 described that year’s stringent actions within Israel and its brutal military rule of the West Bank and Gaza. For Israel itself, the report noted that censorship is based on the Press Ordinance of 1933, with “draconian powers of censorship.” Permits were required to publish, which could be suspended or withdrawn at any time, and pre-publication censorship was authorized. The Israeli Hebrew press formed an Editors’ Committee in 1948 for the purpose of self-censorship. Radio and television had “consensual censorship.” Even a Hebrew song was banned in 1991. There were increasingly harsh measures for covering the Intifada. Many Israeli Hebrew journalists were arrested, imprisoned, beaten by soldiers, and ordered dismissed from their jobs that year. Joint Israeli-Palestinian enterprises were especially targeted. Several journalists also resigned in the face of these restrictions. Israel also tried to prevent publication of a book about Mossad, its intelligence agency, in Canada and the U.S. 70 In 1991, Gaza and the West Bank were under the rule of the Israeli military. Many major Palestinian publications were based in East Jerusalem, which was technically considered within Israel (annexed in 1967), but were treated much more harshly than Israeli publications. Censorship had increased since the 1987 Intifada. Six Palestinian press offices were closed that year. It had become difficult to get a license to publish, and the possession of an unlicensed publication could result in heavy fines and imprisonment. Palestinian journalists estimated that 60 percent of their original material was partially or totally cut by the prepublication censor. In addition, fax machines were banned in Gaza from 1987 to 1989 and phone lines were frequently cut. About 10,000 books were banned. About 30 percent of the members of the Palestinian journalists association had been detained or put under administrative restrictions. Fifty- six Palestinian journalists were deported from 1987 to 1991, and some had been fired upon in their homes. In addition, more than fifty Palestinian writers and poets had been detained, and many were prohibited from entering East Jerusalem. Since the Intifada, Israel had used collective punishment to close universities and educational institutions; 35,000 students were affected. In response, Palestinians organized Popular Education Committees but the Israeli authorities labeled them “cells of illegal teaching.” There were about 150 “incidents” against foreign journalists by the Israeli authorities in the Occupied Territories from 1987 to 1991, including physical attacks, short-term detentions, blacklisting, and confiscation of equipment. ALA Response to Censorship in Israel/Palestine Although ALA Council first addressed censorship in Israel/Palestine in 1984, this action was based on the adoption of the policy on Freedom of Expression for Foreign Nationals at the 1974 Annual Conference in New York City. This preceding resolution was jointly sponsored by the Council’s Intellectual Freedom (IFC) and International Relations Committees (IRC). The policy was based on Article 19 of the United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights: Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to see, receive, and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.8 This policy was adopted to regularize such concerns after approving resolutions put forward by the Intellectual Freedom Committee at the ALA Midwinter meeting on January 25, 1974, dealing with suppression of Portuguese poems, harassment of Soviet author Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, and the burning of books in Chile.9 ALA Council first addressed Israel/Palestine only tangentially when it 71 reaffirmed the 1974 policy on Freedom of Expression of Foreign Nationals in 1984.10 This resolution only mentioned the Occupied Territories in a whereas clause, not a resolved clause. As opposed to resolved clauses, whereas clauses are normally used for background information and do not require any official actions. Since only the resolved clauses are codified, this language disappeared from view. That clause stated that concerning the “occupied area of the West Bank of the Jordan” the IFC and the IRC had been “...unable to ascertain the details of such constraints, but are convinced that there must be some inequity...” It was later disclosed that the 1984 resolution was motivated by an inquiry from a “Chicago-area librarian.”11 This turned out to be David Williams, who was to play a key role in the forthcoming debates.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • “Smoking Gun” Bombshell Interview: Prof. Francis Boyle Exposes The
    2/23/2020 Full transcript of “smoking gun” bombshell interview: Prof. Francis Boyle exposes the bioweapons origins of the CoVid­19 coronavirus – NaturalNew… Full transcript of “smoking gun” bombshell interview: Prof. Francis Boyle exposes the bioweapons origins of the CoVid-19 coronavirus Thursday, February 20, 2020 by: Mike Adams Tags: Alex Jones, biological weapons, bioweapons, coronavirus, Francis Boyle, interview, NIH, outbreak, pandemic, transcript, virus, Wuhan (Natural News) What follows is one of the most important interviews of the year. Biological warfare expert Prof. Francis Boyle appeared as a guest with Alex Jones on the Alex Jones Show, sharing his “smoking gun” findings about the coronavirus being engineered as a weapon that’s designed, “for efficient spreading in the human population,” according to one of the science papers he references. We confirmed Prof. Boyle’s findings by purchasing the full PDF of that paper and reviewing it in a detailed article we posted yesterday at this link. That paper describes the CoVid­19 novel coronavirus as possessing unique “gain­of­function” properties that make it the perfect bioweapon, while confirming these new properties were from artificial origins, not natural viral evolution. (In other words, it was engineered.) Below, we print the full transcript of the Francis Boyle / Alex Jones interview, along with the video of the full exchange below, via Brighteon.com. (The full show is also posted on Banned.video) If you hope to understand anything about what’s happening right now with the coronavirus pandemic, the global cover­up and how the taxpayer­funded NIH is behind these biological weapons, you need to hear and share this interview.
    [Show full text]
  • Why the Good Guys Lost in <Em>Rice V. Cayetano</Em>
    Michigan Journal of Race and Law Volume 7 2002 Not Because They are Brown, But Because of Ea*: Why the Good Guys Lost in Rice V. Cayetano, and Why They Didn't Have to Lose Gavin Clarkson Harvard University Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mjrl Part of the Constitutional Law Commons, Indian and Aboriginal Law Commons, Law and Race Commons, Legal History Commons, and the State and Local Government Law Commons Recommended Citation Gavin Clarkson, Not Because They are Brown, But Because of Ea*: Why the Good Guys Lost in Rice V. Cayetano, and Why They Didn't Have to Lose, 7 MICH. J. RACE & L. 317 (2002). Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mjrl/vol7/iss2/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Michigan Journal of Race and Law by an authorized editor of University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. NOT BECAUSE THEY ARE BROWN, BUT BECAUSE OF EA*:WHY THE GOOD GUYS LOST IN RICE V CAYETANO, AND WHY THEY DIDN'T HAVE TO LOSE Gavin Clarkson** IN TR O D U C T IO N ..........................................................................317 I. CONTEXTUAL PERSPECTIVE ON RELEVANT HISTORY ..........................319 A . Pre-C ontact .................................................................... 320 B. Treaty Making and Removal (1789-1871) ............................. 320 C. Allotment and Assimilation (1871-1928) ............................... 325 D. The Period of Indian Reorganization (1928-1945) ................... 329 E. The Termination Period (1945-1961) ...................................
    [Show full text]
  • 1 the Genocide of the Palestinian People: an International Law and Human Rights Perspective While There Has Been Recent Criticis
    The Genocide of the Palestinian People: An International Law and Human Rights Perspective While there has been recent criticism of those taking the position that Israel is committing genocide against Palestinians, there is a long history of human rights scholarship and legal analysis that supports the assertion. Prominent scholars of the international law crime of genocide and human rights authorities take the position that Israel’s policies toward the Palestinian people could constitute a form of genocide. Those policies range from the 1948 mass killing and displacement of Palestinians to a half- century of military occupation and, correspondingly, the discriminatory legal regime governing Palestinians, repeated military assaults on Gaza, and official Israeli statements expressly favoring the elimination of Palestinians. Genocide is a term that has both sociological and legal meaning. The term genocide was coined in 1944 by a Jewish Polish legal scholar, Raphael Lemkin. For Lemkin, “the term does not necessarily signify mass killings.” He explained: More often [genocide] refers to a coordinated plan aimed at destruction of the essential foundations of the life of national groups so that these groups wither and die like plants that have suffered a blight. The end may be accomplished by the forced disintegration of political and social institutions, of the culture of the people, of their language, their national feelings and their religion. It may be accomplished by wiping out all basis of personal security, liberty, health and dignity. When these means fail the machine gun can always be utilized as a last resort. Genocide is directed against a national group as an entity and the attack on individuals is only secondary to the annihilation of the national group to which they belong.1 Since Lemkin’s first invocation of the term, it has gained political, social, and legal meaning.
    [Show full text]
  • Israeli Media Self-Censorship During the Second Lebanon War
    conflict & communication online, Vol. 18, No. 2, 2019 www.cco.regener-online.de ISSN 1618-0747 Sagi Elbaz & Daniel Bar-Tal Voluntary silence: Israeli media self-censorship during the Second Lebanon War Kurzfassung: Dieser Artikel beschreibt die Charakteristika der Selbstzensur im Allgemeinen, und insbesondere in den Massenmedien, im Hinblick auf Erzählungen von politischer Gewalt, einschließlich Motivation und Auswirkungen von Selbstzensur. Es präsentiert zunächst eine breite theoretische Konzeptualisierung der Selbstzensur und konzentriert sich dann auf seine mediale Praxis. Als Fallstudie wurde die Darstellung des Zweiten Libanonkrieges in den israelischen Medien untersucht. Um Selbstzensur als einen der Gründe für die Dominanz hegemonialer Erzählungen in den Medien zu untersuchen, führten die Autoren Inhaltsanalysen und Tiefeninterviews mit ehemaligen und aktuellen Journalisten durch. Die Ergebnisse der Analysen zeigen, dass israelische Journalisten die Selbstzensur weitverbreitet einsetzen, ihre Motivation, sie zu praktizieren, und die Auswirkungen ihrer Anwendung auf die Gesellschaft. Abstract: This article describes the characteristics of self-censorship in general, specifically in mass media, with regard to narratives of political violence, including motivations for and effects of practicing self-censorship. It first presents a broad theoretical conceptualization of self-censorship, and then focuses on its practice in media. The case study examined the representation of The Second Lebanon War in the Israeli national media. The authors carried out content analysis and in-depth interviews with former and current journalists in order to investigate one of the reasons for the dominance of the hegemonic narrative in the media – namely, self-censorship. Indeed, the analysis revealed widespread use of self-censorship by Israeli journalists, their motivations for practicing it, and the effects of its use on the society.
    [Show full text]
  • International Crisis and Neutrality: United States Foreign Policy Toward the Iran-Iraq War
    Mercer Law Review Volume 43 Number 2 Lead Articles I - The Legal Article 1 Implications of a Nation at War 3-1992 International Crisis and Neutrality: United States Foreign Policy Toward the Iran-Iraq War Francis A. Boyle Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.mercer.edu/jour_mlr Part of the International Law Commons, and the Military, War, and Peace Commons Recommended Citation Boyle, Francis A. (1992) "International Crisis and Neutrality: United States Foreign Policy Toward the Iran- Iraq War," Mercer Law Review: Vol. 43 : No. 2 , Article 1. Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.mercer.edu/jour_mlr/vol43/iss2/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at Mercer Law School Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Mercer Law Review by an authorized editor of Mercer Law School Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. LEAD ARTICLES International Crisis and Neutrality: United States Foreign Policy Toward the Iran-Iraq War by Francis A. Boyle* Prescript This Article was written in 1986 and submitted to the University of New Orleans Symposium on Neutrality. The Article reflects the author's analysis regarding the United States military intervensionism into the Middle East with a special focus on the Persian Gulf region. The author analyzes the United States' policies to divide-and-conquer the Arab oil * Professor of International Law, University of Illinois College of Law, Champaign, Illi- nois. University of Chicago (A.B., 1971); Harvard Law School (J.D., magna cum laude, 1976); Harvard University (A.M., 1978 and Ph.D.
    [Show full text]
  • Palestine, Palestinians and International Law, by Francis Boyle
    This is a draft of "Introduction: Standing in Solidarity with the Palestinian People" to the book, Palestine, Palestinians & International Law by Francis A. Boyle, Clarity Press, Inc., 2003, 205 pp. The following is mirrored from its source at: http://www.derechos.org/human-rights/mena/doc/boyle3.html with extensions to enhance its utility. Palestine, Palestinians and International Law by Francis A. Boyle 29 March 2002 Human Rights in the Middle East and North Africa The Big Lie Chicago Entebbe Lecture The American-Israel Society of International Standing in solidarity with the Palestinian People Suing for Sabra and Shatilla Creating the Palestinian State Etc. Sparring with Jordan The Intifada The Palestinian Declaration of Independence Moving the Mountain On Their Own Middle East Peace Negotiations? The Oslo Bantustan Jerusalem U.S. Mideast Policy v. International Law Dishumanitarian Intervention by the United States of America against Palestine and the Palestinians I am not Arab. I am not Jewish. I am not Palestinian. I am not Israeli. I am Irish American. Our People have no proverbial "horse in this race." What follows is to the best of my immediate recollection: The Big Lie Growing up in the United States during the late 1950s and early 1960s while strongly supporting the just struggle of African Americans for civil rights, I was brainwashed at school as well as by the mainstream news media and popular culture to be just as pro-Israel as everyone else in America. Then came the 1967 Middle East War. At that time, my assessment of the situation was that Israel had attacked these Arab countries first, stolen their lands, and then driven out their respective peoples from their homes.
    [Show full text]
  • The Campaign for Israeli Divestment and the Charge of Anti-Semitism by Joseph Kay 10 April 2003 World Socialist Web Site
    The following is mirrored from its source at: http://www.wsws.org/articles/2003/apr2003/div-a10.shtml with additional links added. The campaign for Israeli divestment and the charge of anti-Semitism By Joseph Kay 10 April 2003 World Socialist Web Site The campaign against "anti-Semitism" on campus Anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism The historical origins of Zionism In response to an escalation of Israeli aggression over the past year, a growing movement has emerged on American campuses opposing the oppression of the Palestinian population. Student groups have held numerous protests at universities throughout the country, and most recently a movement has gained force that calls for the divestment of university assets from Israeli corporations and US firms doing business with Israel. These groups have faced a wave of denunciations, including baseless accusations of anti-Semitism and support for terrorism. University officials have joined hands with Zionist organizations and representatives of both political parties in slandering students and faculty who have joined the movement. The specter of anti-Semitism is raised as part of an effort to de-legitimize any opposition to the policies of the Israeli government and its principal supporter, the United States. The role of university administrations in bolstering the charge of anti-Semitism against supporters of divestment is particularly noteworthy. It is an anti-democratic attempt to intimidate and silence the political views of a section of the student body. The ferocity of the denunciations indicates in its own way the validity of the criticisms: because the policies of the Israeli state cannot be seriously defended through political argument, its supporters attempt to stifle any discussion.
    [Show full text]
  • Media Accountability Online in Israel. an Application of Bourdieu’S Field Theory
    A Service of Leibniz-Informationszentrum econstor Wirtschaft Leibniz Information Centre Make Your Publications Visible. zbw for Economics Kniep, Ronja Article — Published Version Media Accountability Online in Israel. An application of Bourdieu’s field theory Global Media Journal: German Edition Provided in Cooperation with: WZB Berlin Social Science Center Suggested Citation: Kniep, Ronja (2015) : Media Accountability Online in Israel. An application of Bourdieu’s field theory, Global Media Journal: German Edition, ISSN 2196-4807, Universität Erfurt, Erfurt, Vol. 5, Iss. 2, pp. 1-32, http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:gbv:547-201500645 , http://www.globalmediajournal.de/de/2015/12/18/media-accountability-online-in-israel-an- application-of-bourdieus-field-theory/ This Version is available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/231999 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. personal and scholarly purposes. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle You are not to copy documents for public or commercial Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, If the documents have been made available under an Open gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence.
    [Show full text]
  • Israel, Palestine and the Icc
    ISRAEL, PALESTINE AND THE ICC ISRAEL, PALESTINE AND THE ICC Daniel Benoliel † & Ronen Perry †† This Article provides a critical assessment of theoretical and practical arguments for judicial state recognition by the International Criminal Court (ICC). It does so both generally and with regard to a highly pertinent contemporary example, namely a judge-made Palestinian state. In the wake of the Israel–Gaza 2008-09 armed conflict and the recently commenced process in the ICC, the Court will soon face a major challenge – one that holds the potential to define its degree of judicial independence and overall legitimacy. It may need to decide whether a Palestinian state exists, for the purposes of the Court itself, and perhaps in general. Apart from the possibility that such a declaration may constitute a controversial intervention in the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, it would also set a precedent within public international law concerning judicial state recognition. The Rome Statute of 1998 establishing the ICC created a state-based system, so that the existence of a Palestinian state is a precondition for the present proceedings to continue. Moreover, although the ICC potentially bears the authority to investigate crimes that fall under its subject-matter jurisdiction, regardless of where they were committed, the question remains as to whether and to what extent it has jurisdiction over non-member states, in this case Israel. 1 ISRAEL, PALESTINE AND THE ICC Table of Contents Introduction ............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Gender, Race, and Radicalism: Teaching the Autobiographies of Native and African American Women Activists Author(S): Joy James Source: Feminist Teacher, Vol
    Gender, Race, and Radicalism: Teaching the Autobiographies of Native and African American Women Activists Author(s): Joy James Source: Feminist Teacher, Vol. 8, No. 3 (Fall/Winter 1994), pp. 129-139 Published by: University of Illinois Press Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/40545678 Accessed: 02-05-2019 19:25 UTC JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at https://about.jstor.org/terms University of Illinois Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Feminist Teacher This content downloaded from 184.74.26.10 on Thu, 02 May 2019 19:25:48 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms Gender, Race, and Radicalism: Teaching the Autobiographies of Native and African American Women Activists By Joy James 1992- The Post-Columbus Classroom: students perceive "women of color" whom they encounter Women's Resistance to American Racism as "texts," particularly those activists who critique the U.S. state. I imagined that it was difficult for academics to In American society where indigenous and African conceptualize such women as something other than fashion- Americans signify the primitive, exotic (often dangerous) able literary commodities, colorful accessories to euro- "Other," anti-Black and anti-Indian racism coexist within centric a as well as trans-ethnic conservative/liberal larger context of political opposition to radicalism.
    [Show full text]
  • The Lavon Affair
    Israel Military Intelligence: The Lavon Affair jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/lavon.html Best choice for browsing Browse from Czech Republic Browse from France Browse from Sweden Browse from Canada (Summer 1954) Military Intelligence: Table of Contents | The Mossad | Targeted Assassinations The Lavon Affair is a spy story in Israel's early years that left a nasty mark on the young state, with reverberations for the following 20 years. It's name derived from Israeli Defense Minister Pinhas Lavon, though it is also referred to as " Esek HaBish" or "The Mishap". Revolving around nearly a dozen young Egyptian Jews who agreed to spy for Israel against their home country, the affair taps into a story of idealism and self-sacrifice as well as abandonment and an unwillingness to take responsibility. Due to strict censorship in Israel in the early 1950's, few knew that in the year 1954 Israeli underground cells that had been operating in Egypt were uncovered by the Egyptian police. A number of young Jews were arrested and forced to undergo a show trial. Two of them - Yosef Carmon and Max Binnet - committed suicide in prison due to the brutal interrogation methods of the Egyptian police. Two more - Dr. Moshe Marzouk of Cairo and Shmuel Azar of Alexandria - were sentenced to death and hanged in a Cairo prison. Israel glorified them as martyrs. Their memory was sanctified. Neighborhoods and gardens were named after them in Israel, as were dozens of children born in the year 1955. At the same time it was not publicly conceded that they died in the service of Israel.
    [Show full text]
  • Is the Wuhan Coronavirus a Form of Biowarfare?: a Special Interview with Francis Boyle By: Dr
    Is the Wuhan Coronavirus a Form of Biowarfare?: A Special Interview With Francis Boyle By: Dr. Joseph Mercola Dr. Joseph Mercola: Welcome, everyone. This is Dr. Mercola helping you take control of your health and today we are joined by Francis Boyle who really has quite the pedigree. He had his undergraduate training at the University of Chicago and got his JD, lawyer degree, from Harvard and also a PhD in Political Science. He's been quite active in the protection environment from the US government in their creative strategies for bio weapons, and specifically we're talking about coronavirus today. So welcome and thank you for joining us today. Dr. Francis Boyle: Well, thank you very much for having me on, Dr. Mercola, and my best to your viewing audience. Dr. Joseph Mercola: All right, so the coronavirus is a virus that seems to have come from Wuhan, and if you're like me, most of the people in the US have probably never heard of Wuhan before, but it's a pretty big city. It's bigger than New York City, there's 11 million people in this city. So obviously China is a large country with over a billion people, but it's a still a large metropolis, it's not some rural, urban farming community. So it's affected over 50,000 people in China as we're recording this in February, February 14th, so I'm sure it's going to be more by the time this podcast airs, and I'm wondering if you could provide us with your speculations as to how this apparently engineered virus was produced and how it came to be out of Wuhan, because it wasn't due to [Batsu 00:01:42], we know that's for sure.
    [Show full text]